Stef and all,
What might that objective be spicificaly? This part seems
the only unclear area... >;)
Einar Stefferud wrote:
> OK, so now we have a clear understanding of where we all stand;-)...
>
> I do want to mention however that I have not been trying to take over
> the IANA root, and I have not been trying to make any money out of
> this whole affair, and I do not have any problem with people who are
> trying to make some money, or for people who are not trying.
>
> What I have trouble with are people to try to force other people to
> adopt their positions, ratehr than let the market sort them out.
>
> The market has this wonderful property of being
> Like the Devil, taking out the hindmost;-)...
>
> So, I think that at last we can see a reasonable path to take.
> And, we should only include people who support the objective.
>
> Cheers...\Stef
>
> >From your message Wed, 31 Mar 1999 16:40:07 -0800:
> }
> }On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 02:39:23PM -0800, Einar Stefferud wrote:
> }> First, lets answer the question in the Subject line;-)...
> }>
> }> ANSWER: No, the ROOT is not ownable, because:
> }>
> }> 1. It is in fact the collection, with or without documentation, of
> }> all the TLD zones that exist anywhere in the net, including all
> }> the private TLD names that are used by IP based INTRAnets that
> }> are not connected to the rest of the net.
> }
> } You have described a metaphysical construct, not a DNS root.
> } A DNS root is by definition the top of a connected name
> } space. You are of course free to define any metaphysical
> } concepts you want, but this particular definition is not the
> } one the rest of us have been using.
> }
> }[...]
> }
> }> So, the current issue to work on is whether or not there actually is a
> }> way to mount a better DNS ROOT and succeed at marketing it. If it is
> }> possible, then I suggest that a coalition of alternate root advocates
> }> get together and work on making it happen. I further suggest that
> }> this effort not be conducted in public (any more than ICANN conducts
> }> its business in public).
> }
> }As you wish.
> }
> }> This effort need not pretend to be a public affair, and surely we do
> }> not need to involve people who are vociferously (knee jerk) opposed to
> }> the very idea of even trying, as Kent certainly is.
> }
> }Don't be silly. I am not at all opposed people trying such a
> }thing, and I never have been.
> }
> }But in fact, the alternative root folks have been devoting all
> }their energies to trying to first destroy the MoU, and then
> }destroy ICANN. The only honest, creative effort in the past
> }year or so has been Phil Howard's Grass Roots Servers idea.
> }
> }Instead, the rest of you have spent all your time trying to take
> }over the IANA root, not form new roots.
> }
> }> We should all
> }> understand that he thinks the idea is crazy and not worth his
> }> investing anythign into it.
> }> I would hope that he might also discover that it is not worth his
> }> while to invest in trying to defeat it, if as he predicts it can never
> }> succeed in any case.
> }
> }I actually think that alternate roots as a *techie hobby* are a great
> }idea that might, in the long run come to something, and I might
> }well get involved in something like that. However, most of the
> }energy here is from get-rich quick types who see NSI milking
> }monopoly profits, and want a piece of that action. They see
> }this as a "marketing problem". In my opinion, they are fools.
> }
> }> There is also the question of whether or not governments can stop
> }> anyone from owning and using an alternate root? Is it in fact an
> }> illegal act? Is there any real prohibition? Is there any enforcement
> }> authority that can stop anyone from mounting and using an alternate
> }> root? If there is, is it possible that they can stop all INTRAnets
> }> from using a private DNS roots, as they all do today?
> }>
> }> Is there any way to enforce a prohibition against any user on the edge
> }> of the net from pointing at other than the ICANN-Branded-ROOT? I
> }> think not, so I see no harm to come to anyone that does mount an
> }> alternative, other than that they might be wasting their time, effort
> }> and money on an immpossible dream idea.
> }
> }All fine
> }
> }> But, other than this, I see no downsides for anyone that wants to
> }> attempt to mount a competing root.
> }
> }Here you step into foolishness. If you try to *compete* with the
> }global root, you have already lost. There is no money in
> }alternate roots, and there won't be for a long, long time.
> }People who build an alternate root system as a hobby, for fun,
> }could sustain an effort for the long term, and out of such a
> }long term effort something solid and good might emerge.
> }
> }[...]
> }
> }> 3. So, since an alternate root can always be more comprehensive
> }> than the ICANN Branded EXCLUSIVE ROOT, an Alternate root can
> }> manage itself have greater value at all times, if it can also
> }> manage to successfully service its market. EXCLUSIVITY has its
> }> values, but also has its price (in terms of loss of competitive
> }> edge).
> }
> }This is silly. An alternate root can't in fact be more
> }comprehensive than the real root -- all it can do is offer
> }invisible TLDs. It will always be the case that ANYONE WHO
> }ACTUALLY WANTS TO BE VISIBLE WILL BE IN THE REAL ROOT. People
> }can play with cute names like Richard's various toys, but
> }even Richard has REAL email addresses.
> }
> }It is my opinion that the failure of the alternate root movement
> }stems primarily from the fact that it has been dominated by
> }people who try to make money from it immediately, and as soon as
> }anything gets even close, the greedy bastards turn on each other
> }scramble for the biggest slice of the pie, and destroy
> }everything in the process. If people didn't have $$$ in their
> }eyes, and had continued on the path of hobby development, and
> }had written a few Internet Drafts, developed some protocols,
> }got them standardized, etc, the whole thing could have turned
> }out very differently.
> }
> }Money is not going to happen. There is no obvious return on
> }investment in any such activity. If people *honestly* do it for
> }fun, it is possible that a real following might develop, because
> }there will be something of honest technical substance
> }underneath, instead of a bunch of greedy money-hungry wannabe
> }monopolists trying to find the quickest way to make a buck.
> }
> }--
> }Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
> }[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
